Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Of course at the top, it matters a lot, but isn't a lot of mobility also driven by more average careers? Given wage stagnation across much of the Western world, largely driven by "liberal" economic and monetary policy, there is a lot of downward pressure on the benefits of "average" (Non FAANG) careers.
> largely driven by "liberal" economic and monetary policy Mind expanding a little more on that?
Until the early 70's the primary method of managing national economies was via the level of spending a country enacted with less regard given to the level of debt a country held. Economies were more tightly regulated, protections were much stronger in many western countries, and union participation was more common than today.
After a round of economic crisis, with each of them seemingly resistant to influence by the economic tools of the day, countries began to move toward managing their economies through a) promoting the freedom of the market (liberalism) and b) managing spending and economic control through the availability of money (monetary policy), with centralisation of national interest rate levels enacted through central banks.
This worked to a greater or lesser degree (economists seemingly cannot agree) and governments became more open to reform of economic institutions to give more power to the market. This has led to a lessening of strength in those areas of the economy which can impact the free-market (i.e. union membership) and has now become a force for removing non-economic impediments to corporations to seek the lowest wages possible (such as immigration reform to reduce labour costs, etc).
Meanwhile monetary policy has led to ever-decreasing interest rates, which has led to previously "non-economic" goods to become commodities. Housing is a great example, with houses now considered by many to be an asset class which should return continual return in capital value, rather than as a right. Bank accounts are returning functionally zero and less than zero percent returns, which impacts the poor most of all. NFT, crypto, etc, are another - these did not exist prior to monetary policy but they are reacting like an asset class whose existence is used as a stop-gap by those borrowers to avoid holding cash. The world is sloshing with free and near-free money, and it is sending asset classes crazy.
So, costs go up for the poor as they are competing for essentials with rich people who see the same good as an asset class to park investment. The poor get higher interest rates on their loans, so their cost of living goes up. Their wages are negatively impacted through increased competition with people not only in their local area, but globally. Their bank accounts - which previously have returned at a rate higher than inflation, are now being eaten away by fees, negative rates AND inflation.